My accountant and I both have digital certificates and most of the
time encrypt our mails. But he often forgets, meaning sensitive
information is sent in plaintext.
Is there any way to instruct Postfix to reject his mail unless it is encrypted?
I know I can setup TLS, but that is something I do
On 2011-01-06 IT geek 31 wrote:
> My accountant and I both have digital certificates and most of the
> time encrypt our mails. But he often forgets, meaning sensitive
> information is sent in plaintext.
>
> Is there any way to instruct Postfix to reject his mail unless it is
> encrypted?
>
> I k
How can I check & correct the permissions (especially on
$queue_dir/maildrop and $queue_dir/public) using postmulti?
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Campus Benjamin Franklin
Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin
Tel. +49 30
>
> Le 04/01/2011 22:24, Noel Jones a écrit :
> > On 1/4/2011 3:04 PM, pf at alt-ctrl-del.org wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm trying to stop the chain of:
> >> Sender calls recipient, recipient calls their tech,
> >> recipient's tech calls me... Then I tell them to contact the
> >> sender's admin... Then the
This is the current implementation of "reject" footer messages.
Wietse
smtpd_reject_contact_information (default: empty)
Optional contact information that is appended after each SMTP server
4XX or 5XX response.
Example:
/etc/postfix/main.cf:
smt
Ralf Hildebrandt:
> How can I check & correct the permissions (especially on
> $queue_dir/maildrop and $queue_dir/public) using postmulti?
postfix set-permissions
postfix upgrade-configuration
These work on all instances that have multi-instance management
enabled (postmulti -e enable -i instance
On Thursday 06 January 2011 01:45:00 Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 06:56:31PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Each verify or postscreen or tlsmgr process will at set times
> > scan the database for old entries.
> >
> > If it so happens that this scan doesn't finish before the n
Hi all
Postfix version = 2.5.5
I apply a ldap filter to check senders and a ldap filter for the
recipients route.
I have the following warnings in the postfix logs when the filters fail
both due to a ldap size limit exceeded.
agu-fe postfix/trivial-rewrite[30723]: warning: dict_ldap_lookup: Sea
I am talking about the mail content, and I'm using S/MIME.
Yes, I'm sure the accountant will never send me unencrypted mail.
Thanks,
On 6 January 2011 14:25, Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
> On 2011-01-06 IT geek 31 wrote:
>> My accountant and I both have digital certificates and most of the
>> time
On 06/01/11 20:06, IT geek 31 wrote:
> I am talking about the mail content, and I'm using S/MIME.
>
> Yes, I'm sure the accountant will never send me unencrypted mail.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> On 6 January 2011 14:25, Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
>> On 2011-01-06 IT geek 31 wrote:
>>> My accountant and
>> On 6 January 2011 14:25, Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
>>> On 2011-01-06 IT geek 31 wrote:
My accountant and I both have digital certificates and most of the
time encrypt our mails. But he often forgets, meaning sensitive
information is sent in plaintext.
Is there any way to
Hi-
We upgraded to a much newer version of Postfix, and have one stubborn
problem I can't seem to fix. Any help would be much appreciated.
RedHat Linux ES4
Were using RH's postfix: postfix-2.2.10-1.2.1.el4_7
Downloaded source for 2.7.2. Built, and did a make upgrade.
Everything appears to work
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 19:21:56 +
IT geek 31 articulated:
> I think you've nailed it there Tom - I'm trying to teach better
> etiquette. Ideally I'd like a plugin for his mail client (Outlook)
> that automatically detects the recipient (me) and encrypts the mail,
> but I have been unavailable to
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 11:41:28AM -0800, Steve Cooper wrote:
> Here's the line from our trans.exp file:
>
>/^om_.*/ lmtp:inet:opus.allegro.com:24
>
> And, the corresponding line in main.cf:
>
>transport_maps = regexp:/etc/postfix/trans.exp
>
> This all worked fine with the old ve
Steve Cooper:
> 8A30B52465235124 Thu Jan 6 11:08:31 g...@wti.com
> (conversation with opus.allegro.com[10.84.2.10] timed out while
> sending end of data -- message may be sent more than once)
> o...@allegro.com
>
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 11:41:28AM -0800, Steve Cooper wrote:
>
> > Here's the line from our trans.exp file:
> >
> >/^om_.*/ lmtp:inet:opus.allegro.com:24
> >
> > And, the corresponding line in main.cf:
> >
> >transport_maps = regexp:/etc/postfix/trans.exp
> >
> > This all worke
On 6 January 2011 19:49, Jerry wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 19:21:56 +
> IT geek 31 articulated:
>
>> I think you've nailed it there Tom - I'm trying to teach better
>> etiquette. Ideally I'd like a plugin for his mail client (Outlook)
>> that automatically detects the recipient (me) and encr
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 04:56:48PM +0100, Stefan Jakobs wrote:
> > In this case, it is not as critical to set such a flag, but it is important
> > to allow the existing scan to continue to completion, and ignore or
> > (just note) new requests until it does. Once a scan completes, new
> > scans ca
Zitat von IT geek 31 :
On 6 January 2011 19:49, Jerry wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 19:21:56 +
IT geek 31 articulated:
I think you've nailed it there Tom - I'm trying to teach better
etiquette. Ideally I'd like a plugin for his mail client (Outlook)
that automatically detects the recipient
I am helping a school and they have told me they need to keep an
archive of all email through the site for a short period of time.
They also need to delete email after a period of time. In the mean
time this email needs to be available for review by authorized
persons. (In practice actually doing
* Bob Proulx :
> I am helping a school and they have told me they need to keep an
> archive of all email through the site for a short period of time.
> They also need to delete email after a period of time. In the mean
> time this email needs to be available for review by authorized
> persons. (I
Le 06/01/2011 16:30, Wietse Venema a écrit :
> This is the current implementation of "reject" footer messages.
Wietse, thanks infinitely (and I forgot to say it before: happy new
year, best wishes and "bonne santé"!).
>
> Wietse
>
> smtpd_reject_contact_information (default: empty)
>
Le 06/01/2011 21:01, IT geek 31 a écrit :
> [snip]
>
> Outlook is all-or-nothing - it can force encryption for all
> recipients, regardless if they have a certificate or not, or none at
> all.
> AFAIK, it has no way of determining if a recipient has a certificate
> and if so forcing encryption.
>
On 1/6/2011 3:31 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Bob Proulx:
I am helping a school and they have told me they need to keep an
archive of all email through the site for a short period of time.
They also need to delete email after a period of time. In the mean
time this email needs to be available
Zitat von Victor Duchovni :
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 02:39:23PM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
To summarize:
DSN as of RFC 3461 is only recommended as internal status indicator for
message relayed out of the own scope. End-to-end status is neither
supported nor technically possible at the
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 11:16:25PM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
>> How was end-to-end DSN potentially (more) useful for you? In most cases
>> once mail is accepted by an MX host, the next few delivery steps are
>> reliable. If the mail does not then bounce, it is either delivered or
>> quaran
> If you really like to do you might use header_checks to detect the
> Content-Type. Signed mail for example has "Content-Type: multipart/signed".
> For header_checks have a look here
> http://www.postfix.org/header_checks.5.html, but be aware that the content
> has already leaked as others said. I
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 04:04:42PM -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 1/6/2011 3:31 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>> * Bob Proulx:
>>> I am helping a school and they have told me they need to keep an
>>> archive of all email through the site for a short period of time.
>>> They also need to delete email
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 06:15:00PM +0100, postfix wrote:
> I apply a ldap filter to check senders and a ldap filter for the
> recipients route.
> I have the following warnings in the postfix logs when the filters fail
> both due to a ldap size limit exceeded.
>
> agu-fe postfix/trivial-rewrite[30
We're exploring the possibility of using smtp_fallback_relay as a way to
offload re-delivery attempts of deferred mails when we send our weekly
newsletter to 700K+ recipients.
>From the docs at http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_fallback_relay,
here's how I understand this would work:
1)
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 04:52:29PM -0800, Steve Jenkins wrote:
> We're exploring the possibility of using smtp_fallback_relay as a way to
> offload re-delivery attempts of deferred mails when we send our weekly
> newsletter to 700K+ recipients.
A good idea for mailings of this scale.
> 3) fallba
Victor Duchovni:
> Yes.
>
> > 2) Am I accurate in assuming that smtp.receivingdomain.com will see delivery
> > attempts from both IP addresses for mailer.sendingdomain.com and
> > fallbackmailer.sendingdomain.com, and therefore I will need to manage the
> > Sender Reputations of both IPs, make sur
Hi All,
I'm plesk control panel administrator. In this few days I found there are
many deferred message in mailq and I know that hosting server is sending hug
spam message out. Here is the log from postfix.
Jan 6 09:01:27 hosting postfix/pickup[17047]: 5606D841517: uid=48
from=
Jan 6 09:01:27 h
On Fri, 7 Jan 2011, Makara wrote:
Hi All,
I'm plesk control panel administrator. In this few days I found there are
many deferred message in mailq and I know that hosting server is sending hug
spam message out. Here is the log from postfix.
Turn up the log deg level a bit and it will show the
On 1/6/2011 9:41 PM, Makara wrote:
Hi All,
I'm plesk control panel administrator. In this few days I
found there are many deferred message in mailq and I know that
hosting server is sending hug spam message out. Here is the
log from postfix.
Jan 6 09:01:27 hosting postfix/pickup[17047]: 5606D8
35 matches
Mail list logo
